Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Realistic distance for shooting with a long fixed lens.
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
Apr 6, 2017 07:29:05   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
rmalarz wrote:
I would say you have a couple of things working against you. First, and foremost, the distance. That is quite a small subject at that distance. Next, the TC can introduce additional optical issues. It not only multiplies your focal length by 1.4, it also magnifies any optical aberrations by 1.4, as well. I'm not familiar with your camera enough to know if it is an FX or DX format. However, once we get to the projected image size, the number of and size of each photosite on the sensor is going to be a part of the issue as well. I hope this answers some of your questions.
--Bob
I would say you have a couple of things working ag... (show quote)


Thanks for the info. rmalarz. The 7DII is a 1.6 crop. I have used the same lens/TC on my 5DIII (full frame) and got good results, although I have never shot at that distance.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 07:34:19   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
This is primarily directed to members that shoot with long fixed lenses.

Yesterday I was out shooting with the 7DII, 600 f4 plus 1.4TC.
(I have just posted a couple of shots under the post title of "Leucistic Sika Deer").
The shots were at approx. Half a mile. Sky overcast. Temperature approx. 12 Degrees Celcius.
I suspect I need to micro adjust this setup but I can't see that it would result in much better images.
My question is:- Is it realistic or not, to expect sharp images at this distance?
Thanks in anticipation.
This is primarily directed to members that shoot w... (show quote)


No it is not REASONABLE to expect sharp images at a half mile away.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 07:36:33   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Jolly - having shoot with both the 300 and 500 primes and both the 2x and 1.4x extenders, I looked at the deer images and think the issue is something other than micro adjustment or equipment. I don't see camera movement. I wonder if the was moisture on the lens or filter?

I wonder also about your AF focus method. The animals look stable so it doesn't seem like the animal changed position in single shot AF.

My summary opinion: these images should be much sharper given the equipment involved. You can find numerous examples of photographers using similar or the exact same configuration with results showing extremely sharp results.

I trust Canon's IS, but I trust a fast shutter speed and higher ISO even more. I also find continuous AF and back button focus to be a more responsive configuration when using an extender.
Jolly - having shoot with both the 300 and 500 pri... (show quote)


Hi CHG_CANON. Definitely no moisture on the lens. No filter used. Single focus point expanded was set and I do use continuous AF and BBF. There was a couple of light rain showers during the day, so whether humidity came into play I really don't know.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 07:40:38   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
robertjerl wrote:
Half a mile and overcast. Way to far away for a subject of that size to really show details. Overcast, less contrast in the light and it indicates moisture in the air so you have a half mile of moisture/haze in the mix. Unless the air was flat calm you also have that haze moving in layers and air currents thus distorting the light passing through it. I checked your picture and believe you have done about as well as could be expected in the circumstances.


Thanks Jerry for your comments. There was a couple of light rain showers during the time I was there also a very light breeze.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 07:52:09   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
dirtpusher wrote:
Rules of Thumb - Finding Your Lens' 'Sweet Spot

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/content/rules-thumb-finding-your-lens-sweet-spot


Thanks for the attachment dirtpusher. I have read it. But my dilemma was poor light. Whilst I was using a tripod I still felt uncomfortable about reducing the shutter speed below 400. As a result I had the ISO going between 320 and 800, as the light changed. Aperture at 5.6 to get maximum light, also to minimize DOF.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 07:55:44   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
bull drink water wrote:
whether you shoot at medium or long range, you need to learn how to get the most from your camera at those ranges. practice. whether you use a 1.4 or 2.0 tc is up to you. quality prime and tc's are best used. auto vs manual focus is a toss up. if however you decide it's too far you "can" pass on the shot.


Thanks for your comments. As I mentioned previously, I have never shot at this distance with this setup. Hence the query as to whether it was realistic or not.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:01:20   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
kymarto wrote:
Temperature variations cause varying air densities, and so different indices of refraction--like shooting in a bad mirror. This is especially an issue on sunny days, as the sun heats the ground and you have convection currents occurring.


Thanks for your input Toby. I did consider temperature, as stated it was around 12 degrees C. So didn't think that "heat haze" would be an issue.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 08:03:47   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
par4fore wrote:
Did you shoot hand held, if so shutter speed 1/400th is slow for this focal length. Did you use a tripod?


Thanks for the input par4fore. Shot on a tripod. I couldn't hand hold that weight.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:04:41   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
jerryc41 wrote:
How about 250,000 miles? Members have posted sharp images of the moon.



Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:07:10   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
revhen wrote:
Then, again. you could shoot the moon. That's some 238,000 miles away. With the proper filters the sun is 93 million miles. And the stars are light years away.


I've never seen any Deer roaming about on the surface of the moon.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:08:22   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
billnikon wrote:
No it is not REASONABLE to expect sharp images at a half mile away.


Thanks for your input billnikon.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 08:29:32   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
par4fore wrote:
Please look at the photos of Charles Gazer here where he usually post his settings. I feel he proves with his work that shutter speed trumps ISO.
https://www.facebook.com/charles.glatzer


Chas would be an outcast at UHH. He doesn't believe in the benefits of BBF.

The biggest challenge to shooting distant subjects is the atmosphere. On a clear, crisp day using all the proper long lens techniques the OP would have had a wonderful image.

--

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:30:26   #
LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
I've never seen any Deer roaming about on the surface of the moon.


Well, with your lens sharpness issue being what it is, I wouldn't expect that you could see them!

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:30:29   #
TomV Loc: Annapolis, Maryland
 
robertjerl wrote:
Half a mile and overcast. Way to far away for a subject of that size to really show details. Overcast, less contrast in the light and it indicates moisture in the air so you have a half mile of moisture/haze in the mix. Unless the air was flat calm you also have that haze moving in layers and air currents thus distorting the light passing through it. I checked your picture and believe you have done about as well as could be expected in the circumstances.


I agree. I have a similar setup (Minolta 600mm, Sony a99ii and matching 1.4 TC) and at that distance things are not as sharp as when I shoot a subject from 150' away. You need to increase your shutter speed substantially for that setup as well to give yourself a fighting chance. In your photos of the deer you cannot get too much better resolution with the conditions you have. The grasses are slim and any wind movement will cause detail loss. You certainly are too far away for any fur detail. The DOF at that distance is in the order of 10s of yards.

I would try using the same setup and testing at different distances. This will give you an idea of how your photos degrade with distance.
There is also a loss in resolution when using a full-frame lens on a cropped sensor camera.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 08:31:33   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
CHG_CANON wrote:


I trust Canon's IS, but I trust a fast shutter speed and higher ISO even more. I also find continuous AF and back button focus to be a more responsive configuration when using an extender.


I don't trust ANY IS .......but I do trust my own stabilization techniques. Most primes do inherently better away from infinity IMO. There are sweet spots for focus. Atmosphere will play a significant role in your final outcome.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.